This simply is untrue for a huge portion of work done in IT. It seems in the last decade or so many people have forgotten that programming is simply a way to achieve a business goal or task.

Some things are highly valuable (e.g. validating electronic equipment via scores of hardware testing) and can be curated by a skilled "amateur" programmer (we used to call these folks "scripters" back in the day) more or less indefinitely. Adding "real programmers" to the mix would simply cause costs to skyrocket with no discernable impact on revenue produced - just some smug programmers showing off how much better their code looks and how much more maintainable it is.

Stuff like this is domain knowledge distilled into a bash script. If you have the domain knowledge it is typically pretty trivial to simply do a full rewrite if you come in after this guy retires. The domain knowledge and understanding of what the automation is actually doing is the hard and skilled part of the job.

I'm not downvoting the low-value comment because I believe it needs high visibility for many who come here and see the responses to it. You don't need to "engineer" software for every use-case. Sometimes the guy with deep domain knowledge who can hack and kludge a bash or python script together is 10x more valuable than some guy with a CS degree and a toolbox of "best practices" who doesn't give a shit about the underlying task at hand. I'm sure some fancy new frameworks will be used though!

Sysadmins of yesteryear who were expected to deeply understand hardware and OS level things, but not be able to program all understand this and would be able to make great use of AI. The advance of programmers into the sysadmin (aka devops) space is really a travesty of speciality skills being lost and discarded. A whole lot of very pretty overengineered code sitting on top of hardware and systems that are barely understood by those who wrote it and it shows.